Wow, somebody's a tad wound up and unable to get past this. What the heck, I'll play along and go with Matt's spin.

haha, the snark is cute. I'll see if I can match. After all, if jmmie's explanations can't sink in most heads, and the mob can't give it up and move on, maybe I need to take another look at these kinds of stats. I included the first above quote to bring it back to what you said was the "more important" set of stats, though you now seem to be back to putting some focus on the less important "0-9 when scoring 20+". Oh, wait, now it's back to the "most important" ones again. We'll go with that, and even try to make use of Matt's snark and terminology for affect.

You may have swung me over to these kind of stats being relevant and meaningful thing, so wouldn't it be interesting to formulate them for other players, as I did much earlier, but Matt called it cherry picking because I excluded the games since Rudy arrived. I still think that was valid seeing as the Rudy trade massively changed the complexion of the team and combining TEAM win/loss on both sides of the trade to draw conclusions seems a tad nebulous to me. What the heck, maybe use them both and see if there are any conclusions to be drawn from looking at both scenarios!

Kyle Lowry's "Matt52 Stats" (since I don't know a more appropriate title than the inventor himself) prior to the Jose/ED---> Rudy trade:
Kyle....
As starter:-------- 3-15 .166
Off the bench:---- 7-8 .466
Did not play:------ 7-6 .538
Holy shit! At least before the trade, if Kyle doesn't play, the Raps are a .538 winning percentage, playoff team. When he comes off the bench, we don't do as well as when he's out. Ouch, that's not a good sign. But maybe he needs to be a starter. OUCH, that .166 winning percentage when he starts is a huge sign, isn't it? Maybe it's just a coincidence?

Anyway, Kyle's season total "Matt52 Stat", with additional (since Gay trade) "team win/loss as a starter":
(Take what you will from the "as a starter" is the only category of the 3 that's affected since the trade)
Kyle....
As starter:-------- 11-24 .314
Off the bench:---- 7-8 .466
Did not play:------ 7-6 .538
Well, with the post trade 8-9 record added, Kyle's "Matt52 Stats" improve dramatically in the "as a starter" category, but one has to wonder if that's due to Gay or Lowry, seeing as there is such a dramatic upturn (though still below .500) in the winning percentage as a starter. Can one conclude from this that Kyle needs his best buddy to play reasonably well as a starter? Maybe it's just coincidence, but it sure seems that way. The sad thing is that the overall "Matt52 Stat" still looks really abysmal. Unless it's a coincidence, the team is still at it's best when Lowry doesn't play, a tad worse when he comes off the bench, but fn terrible when he starts.

Again, I am not saying Lowry is the cause of the Raptors being 3-15 without Gay, and 11-24 including Gay's presence, when he starts. However, it is extremely interesting and quite the coincidence. So at this time I, personally, am not prepared to talk about the rest of the crap on the roster contributing to losing because the rest of the crap on the roster has shown the ability to win more than they lose this season without the presence of Lowry - albeit it could be just an anomaly or coincidence.

I've been won over. The "Matt52 Stat" tells an incredible amount and I think fans who want this team to do well should boo Lowry as he steps on the floor, and rise up in daily revolt until he's gone.

You seem to be confused.

You just can't use stats this way, p00ka. I thought you knew that? All of these types of discussion are circumstantial and merely a coincidence.

But to play along with your nonsense, as always, you have excluded the Bargnani factor (which I cannot stress enough is merely circumstantial/coincidental afterall) which does remain a constant and once removed from the equation the Raptors are 7-7 with Lowry starting minus Big Poppa Puff. It is also fascinating how 10 of those 14 games are versus playoff and +.500 teams and the Raptors still manage to play .500.

But throw Bargnani back in to the starting lineup and they go 1-3 with 109ppg scored against (remove the PHX game and it is a whopping 121.7ppg). In the prior 14 games, how many points did they give up per game? 93.4. Wowzers!

You just can't use stats this way, p00ka. I thought you knew that? All of these types of discussion are circumstantial and merely a coincidence.

But to play along with your nonsense, as always, you have excluded the Bargnani factor (which I cannot stress enough is merely circumstantial/coincidental afterall) which does remain a constant and once removed from the equation the Raptors are 7-7 with Lowry starting minus Big Poppa Puff. It is also fascinating how 10 of those 14 games are versus playoff and +.500 teams and the Raptors still manage to play .500.

But throw Bargnani back in to the starting lineup and they go 1-3 with 109ppg scored against (remove the PHX game and it is a whopping 121.7ppg). In the prior 14 games, how many points did they give up per game? 93.4. Wowzers!

lmfao,,,,, so now cherry picking and extenuating circumstances are part of the "Matt52 Stat" criteria, but just the ones that fit your narrative? Damn this gets more confusing with each newly formulated bit of criteria. LOL, precious, and that's neither coincidence or surprising.

lmfao,,,,, so now cherry picking and extenuating circumstances are part of the "Matt52 Stat" criteria, but just the ones that fit your narrative? Damn this gets more confusing with each newly formulated bit of criteria. LOL, precious, and that's neither coincidence or surprising.

p00ka p00ka p00ka.

Haven't you been following?

I made a statement. A few people objected, yourself included, to the way I used or manipulated the stat/information. I appreciated the lesson being the dim-witted sort I am. I modified my statement hoping to clarify.

Now you come back with your Lowry nonsense and I am starting to wonder about your goals and objectives here.

This is still the "Everything Bargnani: Grumble, Grumble, Grumble" thread and your post ignored the most important part of this thread. I simply added Bargnani to the numbers/stats/facts your provided.

All of these numbers are circumstantial and likely coincidental after all. It is on the reader to interpret the stats/numbers/facts.

Please try and avoid the p00ka 2-step moving forward. The conversation is and was always that the Raptors are better without Bargnani this season. *focus*

14. We didn't even mention his stupefyingly awful defense, or the fact that the Raptors are minus-7.1 points per 100 possessions when Bargnani plays, and plus-0.8 points per 100 possessions when he sits. I hope Phoenix trades for Bargnani and teams him with Beasley.